Part of  -DASA- Drum & Space Agency, the

Orwellian Forum for Unapproved Knowledge

Patience Earthlings, content heavy.

                                             Edited by Joe White ArtAlienTV


ET Visitors 15

ARTALIENTV LOGO 250p lovegunrecords 1

"I started this page in hope of debunking the 9/11 conspiracy theories but after

closer investigation found far too many inconsistancies to ingnore the claims

made in these controversial videos.

It makes "Roswell", "JFK" and the "Apollo 11" conspiracies look like a walk in the park".

9/11 Conspiracy ?

(Left Video) - 10.49 mins


Was extra equipment attached to flight 175?


In this video you can clearly see a small explosion just before the plane hits the builing.

It also shows the impact of what is claimed to be American Airlines flight 11 that hit the first tower.

This pre impact explosion is even bigger from this camera angle.

(Click to enlarge images)

There are many videos on the net claiming that the 9/11 attacks were part of a US government conspiracy giving them an excuse to invade countries in the middle east. We are going to take a closer look at some of this footage and try and seperate fact from fiction. It is often said by mainstream media that it's easyer to believe a conspiracy than except the facts about 9/11. This may be true but many inconvenient facts have not even been aired by the mainstream media so it is a contradiction to claim this as an excuse for many of these unanswered questions.

Next Page Home

(Left Video) 1.36 mins


9/11 Aircraft (175) is still flying AFTER it crashed into the WTC.


Live NBC images show that flight 175 that supposedly hit the second building is still flying and is seen on the FAA (Federal Aviation Authority) real time flight explorer. It's shown to be at 31,000 feet flying away from the crime scene.


It adds creedance to the other videos that suggest that the second impact was a military aircraft.

(Left Video) 6.12 mins


More proof a plane did not hit the PENTAGON.


There was no aircraft debris left at this so called crash site and the entry hole is too small and low down.


Ground effect dictates that extensive damage to the lawn would have been caused by the engines as it aproached the building at very low altitude.


How does a 100 ton 757 leave no wreckage? Windows on the building were left intact where the wings and tail section would have hit.

(Left Video) - 2 hrs 15


Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out. (Film)


This film looks into the destruction of the buildings.

Eminent architects and construction engineers testify that this was a controlled demolition.

Steel debris was shipped out to China and melted down before any proper investigation was started.

A violation of US law.

For a building to collapse at freefall speed it must have had resistance removed by multiple explosions.There are many witnesses to this.

(Left Video) 1 hr 21


The Pentagon Attack (Film)


This film looks in great detail at the inconsistancies in the official reports and compares credible eye witness accounts (police men) that throw serious doubt on the official line of approach to the crash site.

The eye witnesses almost contradict the theory that the Pentagon was hit by a cruise missile as is suggested at the beginning of this film and in many others.

They saw the plane approach but  saw it pull up and fly away after the explosion. So what hit the Pentagon?

physics911pentagonHole [500 px 70% Q]

(Above) This is the hole that the aircraft supposedly left. It's just too small to have been made by a commercial airliner. The wings and tail section would have sheered off if a plane had hit and would have been left behind the fusalage as it entered the building yet no trace of either were found.

pentagonhole [500 px 70% Q]

(Above) This is another photo of the hole that the aircraft supposedly left. Notice the lack of damage to the green in front of the building. An airliner would have left considerable damage had it flown in that near to the ground.

The huge engines would have gouged a large furrow leading right up to the building.

Also notice the complete lack of debris and the intact windows.

mcint45re-pentagon [500 px 70% Q]

CNN correspondent

Jamie McIntyre reported

live from the Pentagon

shortly after the impact

that there was no evidence

of a plane having crashed

anywhere near the building. 

"From my close-up

inspection, there's no

evidence of a plane having

crashed anywhere near the

Pentagon. The only site,

is the actual side of the

building that's crashed in.

And as I said, the only

pieces left that you can see are small enough that you pick up in your hand. There are no large tail sections, wing sections, fuselage, nothing like that anywhere around which would indicate that the entire plane crashed into the side of the Pentagon and then caused the side to collapse“.

He was obviously remanded as a result because, later in the day he was changing his story (even though subsequent evidence continued to support his initial view). In the days that followed, he tried to deny he’d ever said it. When footage showed his gaff, he tried to explain it away as ‘heat of the moment’.

Respected CNN correspondent Jamie McIntire reporting from the Pentagon on 9/11.

Editors Synopsis


I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised when people look at me like some sort of evil anarchist when talking about the 9/11 conspiracy. They probably have never even seen the videos that I have put here or any of the hundreds like them.

There is still much hysteria over this subject and it’s hardly surprising. It affected many thousands of people as well as the thousands in the New York Fire Department, New York Police Department, FBI, local hospitals and ground workers. Their exemplary conduct is not being called into question here.


The US and UK media have made it seem unpatriotic and practically a terror offence to even look at or mention such video material or to call into question the missing evidence.

This is the same media that failed to point out the obvious flaws in the established story of the events on that day.

When any of them did point out discrepancies they were soon forced to tow the official line. (As is shown in the Jamie Mcintire article above)

The UFO (It’s a UFO because no one has been able to positively indentify it) that hit the Pentagon in my view may have been an anti aircraft missile like the ANRAM. It was probably fired by the USAF to shoot down the plane heading for the building. The plane pulled up and the missile hit the building instead of the plane. A classic evasive manoeuvre.

Why would the American government fire a cruise missile at their own building as is proposed in many videos?

It simply does not add up. My scenario makes more sense and takes the many credible eye witnesses who saw the plane pull up and fly away into account.

This may explain the cover up about the Pentagon explosion. It would be highly embarrassing for them to admit that they had shot themselves with one of their own missiles.


As for the Second Tower hit, it’s hard to say who’s responsible for that grey unmarked plane with no windows that flew into the building. It wasn’t flight 75.

The small explosions at the front of each plane half a second before the impacts on both towers are also a mystery.

They look to me like explosive devices that were triggered by someone with a very good view of the buildings in a nearby location via a radio controlled trigger device or mobile phone.


It’s also a well known fact that information regarding the identities of the highjackers was withheld from the FBI by the CIA, dating as far back as the bombing of the USS Cole. This information was not passed to the FBI and could have prevented the attacks.

It’s this lack of cooperation and information sharing that has given rise to the suspicion that the CIA was involved in a massive cover up.

This is the view of many in the FBI and NYPD and the NYFD.


This view may also go some way to explain why building seven was pulled down. Its demolition destroyed the CIA offices and any evidence of a conspiracy with it. Building seven was practically undamaged yet still supposedly just fell down?

All I can say for definite is to look at the footage and you will probably draw a similar conclusion to me.

The lack of aircraft debris and the removal and destruction of crime scene evidence on an industrial scale to me points to a cover up.

What else could it possibly mean?


If you look at more recent events like the killing of the Navy Seals that hit Osama Bin Laden as well as these issues above it looks like the CIA and perhaps the NSA have been infiltrated by Al-Qaeda or at least have double agents at large.

USO's >

(Left video)

Jim Marrs Terror Conspiracy and 9/11


Investigative journalist Jim Marrs and the Bush administration both see the attacks of 9/11 as an obvious conspiracy. The only question is --- whose conspiracy was it?


From the guy who uncovered the JFK conspiricy.



(Left video) 

Supressed News - Jim Marrs - Classic


Author Jim Marrs discussed various conspiracy theories, and how events such as the ongoing deadly radiation from the Fukushima reactors and spraying of Corexit in the Gulf continue with little news coverage. We live in a "fake world" now, he contended. with such issues surrounding Pres. The so-called killing of bin Laden, and the phony pictures of his dead body that appeared. The secret operatives that claimed to have killed Osama bin Laden dumped his body into the ocean saying it was custom in his homeland of Saudi Arabia, a predominately desert country, and without any objective forensics performed. If bin Laden was unarmed, why didn't they capture him to bring him to trial for his crimes?, asked Marrs.


Very interesting.*******

Watch Jim Marrs explain the 9/11 conspiracy. Nobody can explain it better.